472NOT14.DOC September 8, 1996
Fourth Wave Critique Of Deterrence Theory
Deterrence May Be Appropriate If Challenger Motivated By Opportunity Than
By Need.
Reassurance Takes Into Account Adversarys Acute Sense Of Vulnerability.
Need Focuses On Intolerable Costs Of Inaction.
Leaders Make Motivated Responses To Strategic Dilemmas.
Psychological Stress Arising From Decisional Dilemmas Give Rise To
Defensive Avoidance As A Coping Strategy.
Security Dilemmas Cause Defensive Responses And Over-Estimation Of
Hostility As Well As Bolstering.
Motivated Errors In Information Processing Cause Insensitivity To
Warning--Receptivity To Signals Blocked.
Defensive Avoidance: Avoid, Dismiss, Deny Warnings That Increase Fear.
Insensitivity To Warning A Hallmark Of Defensive Avoidance.
Motivated Bias Response To Needs Or External Pressure.
Motivated Bias Can Lead To Faulty Assessment Of Adversary Resolve,
Overconfidence, Insensitivity To Warnings, And Thus Defeat Deterrence.
Problems In Applying Deterrence: Difficulty In Communicating Capability
And Resolve: What Is The Meaning Of Barking Dogs, Barbed Wire, No
Trespassing Signs?
What Is The Story About Ned Lebows Sons: Eli And David? Why Did Eli Hit
David? Because He Was Told Not To Do So!
Why Did The Soviets Place Missiles In Cuba? Because Kennedy Told Them They
Were Vulnerable And That He Knew They Were. Or Was It Because Khruschev
Thought Kennedy Was Weak , Lacked Resolve, And Thus Discounted His Warning
About Vulnerability?
Challengers Focus On Their Own Needs And Do Not Consider The Needs,
Interests, And Capabilities Of Defenders; Even If Challengers Try Take
Account Needs, Interests, Capabilities Of Defenders, There Is
Misperception.
What Is Successful Deterrence: Failed Deterrence? Why Is It Difficult To
Tell Success Or Failure Of Deterrence?
What Is The Significance Of The North Korean Invasion Of The South For
Deterrence Theory? Munich?
What Is The Problem With The Munich Analogy? With The North Korea War
Analogy? Counterfactual Reasoning. If Hitler Was Motivated By Gain,
Deterrence Was Relevant. If By Fear, Appeasement Was More Appropriate.
Reassurance Dictates That Defenders Try To Communicate To Adversaries
Their Benign Intentions. Why? To Reduce Fear, Misunderstanding,
Insecurity. Responsible For Unintended Escalation.
Tit For Tat As A Reassurance Strategy Does Not Assume Rationality,
Altruism, Communication, Trust. And It Can Be Self-Policing.
But When Relative Gain Is The Motivation , Tit-For-Tat Not As Effective In
Inducing Reciprocity.
Attribution Theory: People Explain The Cooperative Behavior Of Others As A
Consequence Of Situation But Conciliation By Self As Disposition.
Grit Better Than Tit-For-Tat.
Reassurance Via Irrevocable Commitment, Self Restraint, Norms Of
Competition, Limited Security Regimes.